3 ms·

Generational names have always been created by authors to sell books. Adam "Ruins Everything" Conover did a talk at a marking conference where he pulled up old

Generational names have always been created by authors to sell books. Adam "Ruins Everything" Conover did a talk at a marking conference where he pulled up old copies of Time magazine talking about the entitled baby boomers from decades ago; almost identical to the same articles about every other generation. Generational titles were NEVER used to lift anyone up. They were used to sell books, sell newspapers/magazines, blame everything on the youth who knew nothing of hardship or some other fake-rage bullshit. The age ranges are arbitrary and the names that stick are pure chance and/or marketing. Why is NYT referencing a moronic TikTok video anyway? Is NYT now trying to compete with Buzzfeed?

overthemoon 7y ago
That doesn't mean it's not a meaningful distinction. There are objective differences in the ways older people and younger people vote and think. You might not like the exact way it's discussed, but there are objective material realities experienced by a person who grew up in the 60s vs a person growing up now, and these things shape their ideology and voting habits.
booleandilemma 7y ago
There’s a journalist with the same name who has written for Buzzfeed, so, maybe? One of the articles is about gen z / millennials. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/author/taylorlorenz https://www.buzzfeednews.com/author/taylorlorenz https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/taylorlorenz/millennials-are-over https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/taylorlorenz/millennial...
cafard 7y ago
The NYT has sections of serious news, and sections of ridiculous "trend" articles. The trend articles are easy to source, easy to write, and have a shot at making it to page 1 of HN. I tend not to read them, or at least not to believe them when I read them--Mithidratism from reading too many such articles long ago. But then I'm an old bitter boomer, so what do I know?
- Clubber 7y ago
  I wonder if they realize how much they are diluting their brand with this tabloid-esque garbage. The Gray Lady - how ridiculous.

overthemoon 7y ago

That doesn't mean it's not a meaningful distinction. There are objective differences in the ways older people and younger people vote and think. You might not like the exact way it's discussed, but there are objective material realities experienced by a person who grew up in the 60s vs a person growing up now, and these things shape their ideology and voting habits.

booleandilemma 7y ago

There’s a journalist with the same name who has written for Buzzfeed, so, maybe? One of the articles is about gen z / millennials. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/author/taylorlorenz https://www.buzzfeednews.com/author/taylorlorenz https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/taylorlorenz/millennials-are-over https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/taylorlorenz/millennial...

cafard 7y ago

The NYT has sections of serious news, and sections of ridiculous "trend" articles. The trend articles are easy to source, easy to write, and have a shot at making it to page 1 of HN. I tend not to read them, or at least not to believe them when I read them--Mithidratism from reading too many such articles long ago. But then I'm an old bitter boomer, so what do I know?

Clubber 7y ago
I wonder if they realize how much they are diluting their brand with this tabloid-esque garbage. The Gray Lady - how ridiculous.